Feelings, actions, and attachments.

[Sam Vara]

A rather Kantian idea from Bill Vallicella got me thinking about the ethics of helping people, versus merely cultivating goodwill:

Love untranslated into action remains an emotion and in many cases a mere self-indulgence. One enjoys the warm feeling of benevolence and risks succumbing to the illusion that it suffices. Benevolent sentiments are no doubt better than malevolent ones, but an affectless helping of a neighbor who needs help, if that is possible, is better than cultivating warm feelings toward him without lifting a finger. We ought to be detached not only from the outcome of the deed, but also detached from its emotional concomitants.

https://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com ... lated.html

I'm unperturbed by BV's point that the sufficiency of benevolence is illusory; the Buddha was very clear that

non-hate is a root of the wholesome

, or (more positively by Ven. Sujato)

And what is the root of the skillful? Contentment, love, and understanding.

(MN9)

And there are plenty of examples where trying to help a neighbour in difficulty goes so wrong that the would-be helper would have done better to stick to sentiments and feelings.

Rarely for a Roman Catholic, BV points out the possibility of becoming attached to the feelings associated with love. Do Theravadans need to consider the possibility that they need to detach from the good feelings around metta? I think upekkha might do that job. What do others think?

[SarathW]

Dana, Sila, Bhavana go together.
Dana is the action of Mtetta and Karuna.

[santa100]

Problem is non-action metta is cheap, has no concrete metrics, and anyone to everyone can do it. During the Texas hurricane Harvey tragedy, Joel Osteen's become the supreme grand master of that non-action, sheer thought and prayers kind of metta. Expand it a bit further, thought and prayers alone wouldn't have saved the Jews from being exterminated by the Nazis, or the Cambodians from the systematic killing done by that butcher Pol Pot. Non-action metta in those specific cases are beyond self-indulgence or illusion, it is an unforgivable crime.

[SarathW]

My personal opinion is Metta can be practiced in either thought, actions or words.
Not all can practice Metta in action alone.
The way I understand the Metta is practiced to eliminated the hatred in your mind rather than to help someone.
It is also important to understand the far enemy and the near enemy of Metta.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mett%C4%81

[SarathW]

It is important to differentiate the Metta and Karuna.
The way I understand Metta leads to Karuna.
https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/ques ... runa/14329

[Volo]

I pretty much agree with the Ven Thanissaro on this point https://www.dhammatalks.org/books/Beyon ... n0007.html. Helping people is good, but it is not always easy to say what would be the right thing to do, and quite often the best thing is simply to send metta.